Intuitive understanding of the relation between velocities and masses in simulated collisions

REFERENCES

• Anderson, B. L. (2011). Visual perception of materials and surfaces. Current Biology, 21, R978–R983. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2011.11.022
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, N. H. (1970). Averaging model applied to the size-weight illusion. Perception and Psychophysics, 8, 1–4. doi:10.3758/BF03208919
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, N. H. (1981). Foundations of information integration theory. New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, N. H. (1983). Intuitive physics: Understanding and learning of physical relations. In T. J. Tighe & B. E. Shepp (Eds.), Perception, cognition, and development: Interactional analysis (pp. 231–265). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Badler, J. B., Lefèvre, P., & Missal, M. (2012). Divergence between oculomotor and perceptual causality. Journal of Vision, 12(5), 1–15. doi:10.1167/12.5.3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beasley, N. A. (1968). The extent of individual differences in the perception of causality. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 22, 399–407. doi:10.1037/h0082779
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, H. V., & Miles, T. R. (1969). Prior stimulation and the perception of causality. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 21, 134–136. doi:10.1080/14640746908400205
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buckingham, G., Ranger, N. S., & Goodale, M. A. (2011). The material-weight illusion induced by expectations alone. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 73, 36–41. doi:10.3758/s13414-010-0007-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buehner, M. J., & Humphreys, G. R. (2010). Causal contraction: Spatial binding in the perception of collision events. Psychological Science, 21, 44–48. doi:10.1177/0956797609354735
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi, H., & Scholl, B. J. (2006). Measuring causal perception: Connections to representational momentum? Acta Psychologica, 123, 91–111. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2006.06.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clement, J. (1982). Students’ preconceptions in introductory mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 50, 66–71. doi:10.1119/1.12989
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cocco, A., & Masin, S. C. (2010). The law of elasticity. Psicológica, 31, 647–657.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Sá Teixeira, N. A., De Oliveira, A. M., & Viegas, R. (2008). Functional approach to the integration of kinematic and dynamic variables in causal perception: Is there a link between phenomenology and behavioral responses? Japanese Psychological Research, 50, 232–241. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5884.2008.00379.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dijker, A. J. M. (2008). Why Barbie feels heavier than Ken: The influence of size-based expectancies and social cues on the illusory perception of weight. Cognition, 106, 1109–1125. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2007.05.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellis, R. R., & Lederman, S. J. (1999). The material-weight illusion revisited. Perception and Psychophysics, 61, 1564–1576. doi:10.3758/BF03213118
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gemelli, A., & Cappellini, A. (1958). The influence of the subject's attitude in perception. Acta Psychologica, 14, 12–23. doi:10.1016/0001-6918(58)90003-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilden, D. L., & Proffitt, D. R. (1989). Understanding collision dynamics. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15, 372–383. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.15.2.372
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilden, D. L., & Proffitt, D. R. (1994). Heuristic judgment of mass ratio in two-body collisions. Perception and Psychophysics, 56, 708–720. doi:10.3758/BF03208364
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hubbard, T. L. (1997). Target size and displacement along the axis of implied gravitational attraction: Effects of implied weight and evidence of representational gravity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 1484–1493. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.23.6.1484
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hubbard, T. L., Blessum, J. A., & Ruppel, S. E. (2001). Representational momentum and Michotte's “launching effect” paradigm (1946/1963). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 294–301. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.27.1.294
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaiser, M. K., Jonides, J., & Alexander, J. (1986). Intuitive reasoning about abstract and familiar physics problems. Memory and Cognition, 14, 308–312. doi:10.3758/BF03202508
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaiser, M. K., & Proffitt, D. R. (1987). Observers’ sensitivity to dynamic anomalies in collisions. Perception and Psychophysics, 42, 275–280. doi:10.3758/BF03203079
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karpp, E. R., & Anderson, N. H. (1997). Cognitive assessment of function knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 359–376. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199704)34:4<359::AID-TEA6>3.0.CO;2-Q
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kittel, C., Knight, W. D., & Ruderman, M. A. (1973). Mechanics. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Kozhevnikov, M., & Hegarty, M. (2001). Impetus beliefs as default heuristics: Dissociation between explicit and implicit knowledge about motion. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 8, 439–453. doi:10.3758/BF03196179
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levitt, H. (1971). Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 49, 467–477. doi:10.1121/1.1912375
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maloney, L. T., & Brainard, D. H. (2010). Color and material perception: Achievements and challenges. Journal of Vision, 10(9), 1–6. doi:10.1167/10.9.1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCloskey, M. (1983). Intuitive physics. Scientific American, 248, 122–130. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0483-122
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michotte, A. (1963). The perception of causality. London, UK: Methuen.
   Google Scholar
• Murray, D. J., Ellis, R. R., Bandomir, C. A., & Ross, H. E. (1999). Charpentier (1981) on the size-weight illusion. Perception and Psychophysics, 61, 1681–1685. doi:10.3758/BF03213127
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Natsoulas, T. (1961). Principles of momentum and kinetic energy in the perception of causality. American Journal of Psychology, 74, 394–402. doi:10.2307/1419745
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'Sullivan, C., Dingliana, J., Giang, T., & Kaiser, M. K. (2003). Evaluating the visual fidelity of physically based animations. ACM Transactions on Graphics, 22, 527–536. doi:10.1145/882262.882303
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Powesland, P. F. (1959). The effect of practice upon the perception of causality. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 13, 155–168. doi:10.1037/h0083773
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Proffitt, D. R., & Gilden, D. L. (1989). Understanding natural dynamics. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15, 384–393. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.15.2.384
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Proffitt, D. R., Kaiser, M. K., & Whelan, S. M. (1990). Understanding wheel dynamics. Cognitive Psychology, 22, 342–373. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(90)90007-Q
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reitsma, P. S. A., & O'Sullivan, C. (2009). Effect of scenario on perceptual sensitivity to errors in animation. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception, 6(3), 1–16. doi:10.1145/1577755.1577758
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Runeson, S. (1983). On visual perception of dynamic events ( Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis: Studia Psychologica Upsaliensia, Serial No. 9). Stockholm, Sweden: Almqvist & Wiksell. (Original work published 1977)
   Google Scholar
• Runeson, S., Juslin, P., & Olsson, H. (2000). Visual perception of dynamic properties: Cue heuristics versus direct-perceptual competence. Psychological Review, 107, 525–555. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.107.3.525
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Runeson, S., & Vedeler, D. (1993). The indispensability of precollision kinematics in the visual perception of relative mass. Perception and Psychophysics, 53, 617–632. doi:10.3758/BF03211738
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanborn, A. N., Mansinghka, V. K., & Griffiths, T. L. (2013). Reconciling intuitive physics and Newtonian mechanics for colliding objects. Psychological Review, 120, 411–437. doi:10.1037/a0031912
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlottmann, A., & Anderson, N. H. (1993). An information integration approach to phenomenal causality. Memory and Cognition, 21, 785–801. doi:10.3758/BF03202746
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scholl, B. J., & Nakayama, K. (2004). Illusory causal crescents: Misperceived spatial relations due to perceived causality. Perception, 33, 455–469. doi:10.1068/p5172
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vicovaro, M. (2012). Intuitive physics of collision effects on simulated spheres differing in size, velocity, and material. Psicológica, 33, 451–471.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White, P. A. (2006). The role of activity in visual impressions of causality. Acta Psychologica, 123, 166–185. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2006.05.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White, P. A. (2009). Perception of forces exerted by objects in collision events. Psychological Review, 116, 580–601. doi:10.1037/a0016337
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White, P. A. (2012a). The experience of force: The role of haptic experience of forces in visual perception of object motion and interactions, mental simulation, and motion-related judgments. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 589–615. doi:10.1037/a0025587
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White, P. A. (2012b). Visual impressions of causality: Effects of manipulating the direction of the target object's motion in a collision event. Visual Cognition, 20, 121–142. doi:10.1080/13506285.2011.653418
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young, M. E., Rogers, E. T., & Beckmann, J. S. (2005). Causal impressions: Predicting when, not just whether. Memory and Cognition, 33, 320–331. doi:10.3758/BF03195320
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar